Impact of teacher preparation on student learning in North Carolina public schools

Carolina Institute
for Public Policy
The Impact of Teacher Preparation
on
Student Learning
in
North Carolina Public Schools
January 2010
–
D’Amico, who is responsible for the overall look and polish of the report. The lead author is
UNC Undergraduate Prepared and MAT Teachers’ Effects on Test Score Gains
year for which NAEP scores are available, North Carolina’s 4
. On North Carolina’s own End
thirds of the state’s 3
gation to provide a “sound basic education” to a large
proportion of North Carolina’s minority and low
teachers in the state’s classrooms, leaders of the University of North Carolina
prepared by one of the UNC system’s traditional undergraduate teacher education programs
By “other sources,” we refer to the combined set
middle school level, the average gains in students’ knowledge and skills produced by teachers
the UNC system’s Master of Arts in Teaching programs are similar to those produced by
programs to meet if they are to help improve the performance of the state’s public schools.
uch as teachers’ salaries and working conditions. Increasing the quality
To accomplish the study objective, we connected individual students’ test scores to the
their students’ test scores.
On the premise that the influence of teachers’ university preparation is likely to diminish as
se with fewer than 10 years’
–
–
include each student’s prior year test scores in reading and mathematics in order to
estimate the value added to each student’s skills and knowledge during the school year. Prior
“nested” within classrooms within s
Student Classroom School
Table 1: UNC Undergraduate Prepared and MAT Teachers’ Effects on Test Score Gains
“alternative” route. Examples of alternative routes are “lateral entry” programs in which college
in the “all other teachers” category.
– –
ers had taught all of the state’s high school courses with end
prepared teachers had taught all of the state’s high school science
–
the “active ingredients” or program components that make for better performance. As
one education dean remarked, the present findings “don’t tell us what to do, but they do
tell us where to look.” That is, the findings point to areas where institutions need
Our analysis of institutions’ effectiveness by subject and level can cast further light on the
programs’ strengths and weaknesses. Consider the case of NC State’s half
–
students taught by the program’s graduates score about 1.5 points lower than students taught by
tution’s graduates perform
– –
Another way of “cutting” the findings is to ask how much of a given teacher preparation
program’s performance is accounted for by the academic ability of the students adm
tease these two effects apart by conducting analyses without controlling for teachers’ academic
that the program’s gradu
controls for teachers’ prior academic ability are introduced, students taught by graduates of this
sample to teachers with less than 10 years’ experience. If we had in
s especially good or bad at it.) For teachers with one or two years’
– –
–
–
– the equivalent of about 18 days’ worth
premium of 10% for teachers with master’s degrees and 12% for teachers with National Board
(master’s or beyond) did have a positive impact on student test scor
teachers with less than 10 years’ experience, certification by the National Board for Professional
the average ability of a student’s peers in a given class, and (2) the range of abilities in the class.
By “average ability of a student’s peers,” we mean the average prior year’s test scores
plausible increase in the average ability of a student’s peers (.25 standard deviations) is
of schooling. A student’s peers in the
ymakers have expressed interest in how well the University’s
different types of Master’s degrees. And finally, we will estimate the impact of UNC principal
– –
–
–
—
— —
—
— —
—
—
—
—
— —
— —
—
—
— —

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Carolina Institute
for Public Policy
The Impact of Teacher Preparation
on
Student Learning
in
North Carolina Public Schools
January 2010
–
D’Amico, who is responsible for the overall look and polish of the report. The lead author is
UNC Undergraduate Prepared and MAT Teachers’ Effects on Test Score Gains
year for which NAEP scores are available, North Carolina’s 4
. On North Carolina’s own End
thirds of the state’s 3
gation to provide a “sound basic education” to a large
proportion of North Carolina’s minority and low
teachers in the state’s classrooms, leaders of the University of North Carolina
prepared by one of the UNC system’s traditional undergraduate teacher education programs
By “other sources,” we refer to the combined set
middle school level, the average gains in students’ knowledge and skills produced by teachers
the UNC system’s Master of Arts in Teaching programs are similar to those produced by
programs to meet if they are to help improve the performance of the state’s public schools.
uch as teachers’ salaries and working conditions. Increasing the quality
To accomplish the study objective, we connected individual students’ test scores to the
their students’ test scores.
On the premise that the influence of teachers’ university preparation is likely to diminish as
se with fewer than 10 years’
–
–
include each student’s prior year test scores in reading and mathematics in order to
estimate the value added to each student’s skills and knowledge during the school year. Prior
“nested” within classrooms within s
Student Classroom School
Table 1: UNC Undergraduate Prepared and MAT Teachers’ Effects on Test Score Gains
“alternative” route. Examples of alternative routes are “lateral entry” programs in which college
in the “all other teachers” category.
– –
ers had taught all of the state’s high school courses with end
prepared teachers had taught all of the state’s high school science
–
the “active ingredients” or program components that make for better performance. As
one education dean remarked, the present findings “don’t tell us what to do, but they do
tell us where to look.” That is, the findings point to areas where institutions need
Our analysis of institutions’ effectiveness by subject and level can cast further light on the
programs’ strengths and weaknesses. Consider the case of NC State’s half
–
students taught by the program’s graduates score about 1.5 points lower than students taught by
tution’s graduates perform
– –
Another way of “cutting” the findings is to ask how much of a given teacher preparation
program’s performance is accounted for by the academic ability of the students adm
tease these two effects apart by conducting analyses without controlling for teachers’ academic
that the program’s gradu
controls for teachers’ prior academic ability are introduced, students taught by graduates of this
sample to teachers with less than 10 years’ experience. If we had in
s especially good or bad at it.) For teachers with one or two years’
– –
–
–
– the equivalent of about 18 days’ worth
premium of 10% for teachers with master’s degrees and 12% for teachers with National Board
(master’s or beyond) did have a positive impact on student test scor
teachers with less than 10 years’ experience, certification by the National Board for Professional
the average ability of a student’s peers in a given class, and (2) the range of abilities in the class.
By “average ability of a student’s peers,” we mean the average prior year’s test scores
plausible increase in the average ability of a student’s peers (.25 standard deviations) is
of schooling. A student’s peers in the
ymakers have expressed interest in how well the University’s
different types of Master’s degrees. And finally, we will estimate the impact of UNC principal
– –
–
–
—
— —
—
— —
—
—
—
—
— —
— —
—
—
— —